[x]

Not quite. We were targeting industrial facilities and their workforces because they were contributing to the war effort against us. What Sherman did was far more akin to the incendiary bombing of civilian targets in Japan, or the firebombing of Dresden. It was pure carnage. The destruction of Atlanta's industry probably did shorten the war, but Southerners have always had that 'fight to the last man' attitude, so killing so many civilians probably didn't bring an end to the war much faster, if at all. The destruction of the industry in the city, however, did shorten the war significantly.

You seem confused.

Aerial bombardment was a lot more destructive of civilian lives than anything that Sherman did.

Targets weren't pinpointed in WWII and it was difficult to avoid or escape the fires that followed bomber attacks.

[JamesP81]

You seem confused.

Not confused at all. That's what happens when you sit down and study the matter at hand.

The British were the ones doing the indiscriminate bombing. Granted, bombing wasn't nearly so precise at that time as it is now; there were many civilian casulaties. The difference is that we were, in fact, targeting specific industrial targets. The British were just randomly bombing. And Sherman was randomly killing anyone that it was convenient to. What Sherman did was far more akin to our use of atomic bombs on Japan than it was to daylight bombing of Germany's industrial areas.